A puzzling lack of innovation?

[maflynn]

I hear people buy them, but I never see them. People need to learn to not be embarrassed about their inferior phones.

Not true, in fact I tend to see about an equal mix if not more folks on the subway with android phones then iPhones. In 2009, all I saw was iPhones on the subway as I commute, then in late 2010 and now, I see the balance has shifted.

by the way instead of making blind fanboy blanket statements, what specifically makes android inferior. True there are some things lacking on the platform, but the same thing could and is said about iOS.

 

[*LTD*]

Not true, in fact I tend to see about an equal mix if not more folks on the subway with android phones then iPhones. In 2009, all I saw was iPhones on the subway as I commute, then in late 2010 and now, I see the balance has shifted.

by the way instead of making blind fanboy blanket statements, what specifically makes android inferior. True there are some things lacking on the platform, but the same thing could and is said about iOS.

Unintuitive, unoptimized operating system. Lousy multitouch performance. Lousy app store. The biggest problems: bad animation performance and touch responsiveness. No GPU acceleration for UI rendering. Google says better hardware will solve the problem. No, it won't. Throwing two cores at the problem will get you better performance and no battery life.Even then, make sure your screen doesn't get too big.

Android on the mish-mash of hardware it's on is the ultimate bottom-of-the-barrel commodity-ware. And it shows.

Most of this comes from whoring out the OS to anyone that can slam together a box. Shows a startling lack of respect and care for the OS. Just like the Wintel world. License your OS to everyone and watch the share numbers increase, while quality decreases.

Why is this happening?

Google is not about creating the best mobile user experience. Heavens no. Google's primary business is ads. Nearly EVERYTHING they produce is a vehicle to facilitate the viewing, dissemination and consumption of ads and generation of ad-based revenue.

This is why Android has so many issues. Google's focus is not the USER and how the user should ideally interact with tech. There is no over-arching user-centric philosophy over at Google, apart from the "open" slogan, which is about as useful as tats on a bull when the user experience is crap. Google's focus is on revenue generation via ads. Android phones are ad-viewing machines wrapped in hardware and an OS framework. That's it.

So why the explosion in market share?

Simple.

The only touchscreen phones that most closely resemble iPhones are Android-based phones. There's little to nothing else (except perennial late-comer MS, but only recently) and Google has flooded the market with them at all price points, fragmentation, etc. There are around 40+ Android phones if not more. It's throwing everything against a wall hoping something will stick. Of course, there is no single iPhone-Killer because Google WILL NOT MAKE ONE (I doubt they would know how - it's currently impossible with their current business model anyway.) It's completely contrary to their reason for being in the market in the first place. Even with their 40+ phones they can barely surpass Apple's single (or at most two) iPhone(s) on a single carrier in the US. That's really saying something.

Cheers.

 

[ChazUK]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.1; en-gb; Nexus S Build/GRH78) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

Have you used a modern Android device LTD?

5 point multitouch works flawlessly on my Nexus S and Galaxy Tab.

The platform has come on leaps and bounds since the G1 and even the Android 2.1 offerings of the Nexus One are slow compared to modern devices running 2.2 or even 2.3. Gingerbread on the Nexus S is a joy to use.

 

[roadbloc]

Unintuitive, unoptimized operating system. Lousy multitouch performance. Lousy app store. The biggest problems: bad animation performance and touch responsiveness. No GPU acceleration for UI rendering. Google says better hardware will solve the problem. No, it won't. Throwing two cores at the problem will get you better performance and no battery life.Even then, make sure your screen doesn't get too big.

I don't think you have ever used an Android phone. Since the majority of smartphone users where I live use Android and WP7, and I have used them often, I have come to the conclusion that you have no idea what you are on about.

At the moment, Android and iPhone are on a par, and it is going to be very interesting which one pulls through with a majority. One thing is for certain... BlackBerry is dead.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Not true, in fact I tend to see about an equal mix if not more folks on the subway with android phones then iPhones. In 2009, all I saw was iPhones on the subway as I commute, then in late 2010 and now, I see the balance has shifted.

by the way instead of making blind fanboy blanket statements, what specifically makes android inferior. True there are some things lacking on the platform, but the same thing could and is said about iOS.

you should see what the people in my computer science classes are using for cell phones.
Between Android, BB and iPhones the phone the fews other students have are the iPhone and Android is the most common. Blackberry is fairly high and greatly out number the iphones.

I don't think you have ever used an Android phone. Since the majority of smartphone users where I live use Android and WP7, and I have used them often, I have come to the conclusion that you have no idea what you are on about.

At the moment, Android and iPhone are on a par, and it is going to be very interesting which one pulls through with a majority. One thing is for certain... BlackBerry is dead.

Come on this is LTD you are talking about. If it does not have an Apple label on it he automatically assumes it sucks and will not use it. LTD to me is the metric on how to judge other Apple fanboys here.

 

[roadbloc]

Come on this is LTD you are talking about. If it does not have an Apple label on it he automatically assumes it sucks and will not use it. LTD to me is the metric on how to judge other Apple fanboys here.

I still have the feeling he thinks I'm making it all up. So I got a little proof. Had a chat on PingChat with a friend and since he had just replaced his iPhone 3G with an Android based device (Motorola somethingorother). I asked the question on which he thought was better.

There we go. He misses the App store, but he prefers Android in general.

 

[RedTomato]

Can this thread not become an X vs Y flamewar please?

All tools have their uses. Windows works well in a 20,000 seat corp, OSX not so well. At home for the family, OSX is wonderful, Linux not so good. For a server, Linux is great etc etc.

I like Android, but I have two kids and a job, I want a phone that I don't need to spend a lot of time modifying. iPhone with jailbreak and SBSettings and BiteSMS does everything I want.

Back to innovation. Everything builds on something else. Someone above in this thread said they saw one particular model of monitor as innovative. I don't see that at all, but it's what they think. Maybe they're very closely bound up in the world of monitors and it's a big deal to them.

All modern computers and phones are Turning Machines, and Alan Turing developed his theory over 60 years ago. Every computer existing, and all programs running on them can be stimulated exactly by laying out rocks in a field and turning them over according to the rules laid out in its Turing Machine table.

It's only now that scientists are starting to try to create non-Turing Machine computers (ie. Quantum Computers) and even then it is debatable if they do represent a step towards non-Turning machines, so Alan Turing might today say 'Hmm. 2011, and still no progress or innovation in computing in the last 60 years.'

 

[nightfly13]

A blog/article that speaks to this thread's question

http://blogs.computerworld.com/1766...e_in_patents_so_why_does_it_lag_in_innovation

I'm not the only one who observes this puzzling lack of innovation.

 

[KnightWRX]

I like Android, but I have two kids and a job, I want a phone that I don't need to spend a lot of time modifying. iPhone with jailbreak and SBSettings and BiteSMS does everything I want.

A funny comment. You don't want to spend time modifying a phone, yet you took the time to jailbreak to install a better SMS app and a different settings app.

You think Android would have even required that much fiddling ?

Seriously folks, use the product before commenting on it. It will make you seem less "miss-informed".

 

[RedTomato]

A funny comment. You don't want to spend time modifying a phone, yet you took the time to jailbreak to install a better SMS app and a different settings app.

You think Android would have even required that much fiddling ?

Seriously folks, use the product before commenting on it. It will make you seem less "miss-informed".

Jailbreak took me a few seconds on this phone. BiteSMS and SBS settings likewise as I've used them before. Android has similar apps to them, so not sure where your point comes from.

Last year, I had my old iPhone 2G stolen (iOS 3.1.3), so I bought a second hand iPhone 3G. Plugged it into iTunes, and within minutes everything was restored perfectly onto iOS 4.1, all the savepoints in my games and apps, mobile safari was restored with all my pages open at the same points on the page as they were on my old phone, a half-filled in webform was restored with the data entered, unfinished sms texts were all restored, cursor put at the same place where I'd left it on the old phone, etc etc.

I found that quite amazing to be honest. Across two different generations of iPhones and iOS. Do Android restores work so smoothly? Not being snarky, just asking. (I'm sure iPhones have sometimes failed to restore properly too)

 

[RedTomato]

http://blogs.computerworld.com/1766...e_in_patents_so_why_does_it_lag_in_innovation

I'm not the only one who observes this puzzling lack of innovation.

Middle management, tribal infighting between divisions (aka 'efficient internal market'), and Ballmer's management by intimidation practices. Gates was a quiet man able to get the best out of people. Ballmer isn't.

 

[Winni]

So I've been discussing/debating with a couple friends who are typical Apple haters (and they accuse me of being a blinder-wearing fanboy kool-aid bibber) but I've realized how the other major companies in the tech world have really innovated very little in the last decade, while Apple has seemingly single-handedly changed the tech world and is constantly out in front.

So I'm hoping it's not as stark and one-sided as I now envision it to be. Here's the scope of my question:

What are innovative physical products (ie. not gmail or software products) that have been revolutionary for the tech industry and successfully adopted in the past decade that were not designed and launched first by Apple?

So far I've thought of three products from the past decade that were truly innovative and successful, I'm hopeful you'll help me think of more.

TiVO. Let the clichés begin: game-changer, revolutionary, you fill in the blanks. It was an awesome product that Apple didn't have anything to do with.

Blackberry. Yes they've basically been beaten at their own game, but it has to be said they were truly innovative and very successful.

The PS3. You could maybe put the XBOX 360 in here too, but their combination of evolutionary console upgrades with media center/BluRay was quite innovative (BluRay is the only other credit I can give to the mighty fallen tech giant Sony). iOS is the new king of the hill as far as games go, but I'll give credit to the others (and Wii) for not standing still/copying Apple the way most tech companies seem to these days.

What other products am I missing? When I think of HP innovations, I get stuck at printer ink chip security technology. Thanks but no thanks. Dell? MS's Zune? Where's the innovation? Sony has fallen off the innovation map, weirdly.

Help me think of other game-changing tech products that maybe I'm forgetting or taking for granted. Kindle might be close, but without Amazon releasing their sales figures, it's hard to call it a bona fide success.

I'm not a tech journalist, and I suppose I'm opening myself up to haters (what are you doing on a Mac forum, btw?) but I'm really hope that innovation isn't as stagnated as it appears to be for me now. Let's try to keep it clean

The Kindle was not the first eBook reader on the market, but it was the first SUCCESSFUL eBook reader with a huge content library. And according to Amazon, they are now selling more eBooks than physical books. So this thing must be a massive success.

Apple did NOT invent the mp3 player, so the credit for innovation does not go to them. Apple just happens to have the most successful mp3 player. And how this could happen with this crappy click-wheel "interface" is still beyond me - the original iPods were a nightmare to use, and iTunes itself still sucks.

Apple did NOT invent the touch interface either, and the tablet concept itself also was not conceived by them. We've had touch interfaces in PCs since the 1980s. Just guess for a second what those displays at your local bar or restaurant are.

Apple did also not invent the mouse and they did not invent the graphical user interface, so they do not deserve credit for that innovation either. That credit exclusively goes to Xerox. Apple "only" deserves credit for making a mouse-driven computer with a GUI a mass compatible success. But then again, Microsoft made those machines even a greater success with their Windows platform.

So although Apple claims to be ah-so innovative, and most Apple users firmly believe in this, it is usually not completely true. Similar to Microsoft, they take over ideas that others already had, work on them, and turn them into something with an Apple personality.

Oh, and neither the Xbox 360 nor the PS3 are really that innovative. I mean, we've already had game consoles back in the 1970s. The PS3 and the Xbox 360 just added enormous graphics and processing power to an already existing concept.

iOS certainly is NOT the new king of the hill when it comes to games. Most of the games for iOS are either ports of 1980s/1990s PC games, or they are rather simple casual games like Plants vs Zombies, Bejeweled or Angry Birds. That's hardly important, and while they certainly sell a lot, the real gaming still happens either on PCs or the Xbox 360 and the PS3.

But since we're talking about innovation, Kinect (and similar technologies) will certainly change the ways we will interact with game consoles - and(!) computers - in the future. Microsoft bought the right startup company this time.

We will also soon see a flood of wearable devices ("augmented reality"). Apple has filed for several patents in this area, but let's also not get too excited about this either: "Wearables" have been in the talk since the 1980s, too, and we've still not seen anything on the mass market that's really useful or even working.

 

[KnightWRX]

Jailbreak took me a few seconds on this phone. BiteSMS and SBS settings likewise as I've used them before. Android has similar apps to them, so not sure where your point comes from.

My point is you made a comment about Android requiring a lot of "time modifying" and yet you have obviously no idea how Android even works from this part of your comment :

Do Android restores work so smoothly? Not being snarky, just asking. (I'm sure iPhones have sometimes failed to restore properly too)

Please drop any Android comments until you are informed. Do not presume to know anything about Android or claim that it's a phone that someone needs "to spend a lot of time modifying"

That is my point. I thought it was pretty obvious from my first reply to you on this subject.

Middle management, tribal infighting between divisions (aka 'efficient internal market'), and Ballmer's management by intimidation practices. Gates was a quiet man able to get the best out of people. Ballmer isn't.

Gates was not the man you paint him out to be at all. Gates was actually quite vocal and involved in company affairs, going as far as e-mailing product groups directly to berate them for poor quality of their products. There are many stories on the net about it :

http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/06/25/gates-sends-angry-e-mail-sounds-just-like-a-customer/

Again, please do not talk about things you do not know about. It doesn't at all help your credibility.

 

[*LTD*]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.1; en-gb; Nexus S Build/GRH78) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

Have you used a modern Android device LTD?

5 point multitouch works flawlessly on my Nexus S and Galaxy Tab.

The platform has come on leaps and bounds since the G1 and even the Android 2.1 offerings of the Nexus One are slow compared to modern devices running 2.2 or even 2.3. Gingerbread on the Nexus S is a joy to use.

If the HTC Desire Z is anything to go by, it's no surprise why the iPhone gets the glory.

I wonder who Google is trying to kid with that thing.

So yes, I've used one. Nearly everyone has to some degree, of for no other reason than curiosity. It became readily apparent that it's no Apple device, that's for sure.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)



If the HTC Desire Z is anything to go by, it's no surprise why the iPhone gets the glory.

I wonder who Google is trying to kid with that thing.

So yes, I've used one. Nearly everyone has to some degree, of for no other reason than curiosity. It became readily apparent that it's no Apple device, that's for sure.

Umm playing with one in a store is not using one. That is going there just to make sure you think it sucks and finding the reason to say it sucks.
Unless you owned one and played with it for more than a few days you just did what many typical Android bashers do here. Go to the store just to say they have so it can say it sucks.

 

[*LTD*]

Umm playing with one in a store is not using one. That is going there just to make sure you think it sucks and finding the reason to say it sucks.
Unless you owned one and played with it for more than a few days you just did what many typical Android bashers do here. Go to the store just to say they have so it can say it sucks.

It doesn't take very long to see deeply flawed design. With Android and Google's partner products, you don't need to do any searching to see just how inferior a platform it is and exactly where Google's priorities lie.

When something stinks, you already smell it downwind.

I feel sorry for Eric T. Mole now that Verizon will carry the iPhone. The game's about change again.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

It doesn't take very long to see deeply flawed design. With Android and Google's partner products, you don't need to do any searching to see just how inferior a platform it is and exactly where Google's priorities lie.

When something stinks, you already smell it downwind.

I feel sorry for Eric T. Mole now that Verizon will carry the iPhone. The game's about change again.

but from you that means very little because you already have admit multiple times before that if it does not have an apple label on it you assume it sucks until proven other wise and from other post on these boards you can get that you look for reason non-apple product sucks and refuse to look at the positives

 

[Liquorpuki]

The Kindle was not the first eBook reader on the market, but it was the first SUCCESSFUL eBook reader with a huge content library. And according to Amazon, they are now selling more eBooks than physical books. So this thing must be a massive success.

Apple did NOT invent the mp3 player, so the credit for innovation does not go to them. Apple just happens to have the most successful mp3 player. And how this could happen with this crappy click-wheel "interface" is still beyond me - the original iPods were a nightmare to use, and iTunes itself still sucks.

Apple did NOT invent the touch interface either, and the tablet concept itself also was not conceived by them. We've had touch interfaces in PCs since the 1980s. Just guess for a second what those displays at your local bar or restaurant are.

Apple did also not invent the mouse and they did not invent the graphical user interface, so they do not deserve credit for that innovation either. That credit exclusively goes to Xerox. Apple "only" deserves credit for making a mouse-driven computer with a GUI a mass compatible success. But then again, Microsoft made those machines even a greater success with their Windows platform.

So although Apple claims to be ah-so innovative, and most Apple users firmly believe in this, it is usually not completely true. Similar to Microsoft, they take over ideas that others already had, work on them, and turn them into something with an Apple personality.

Oh, and neither the Xbox 360 nor the PS3 are really that innovative. I mean, we've already had game consoles back in the 1970s. The PS3 and the Xbox 360 just added enormous graphics and processing power to an already existing concept.

iOS certainly is NOT the new king of the hill when it comes to games. Most of the games for iOS are either ports of 1980s/1990s PC games, or they are rather simple casual games like Plants vs Zombies, Bejeweled or Angry Birds. That's hardly important, and while they certainly sell a lot, the real gaming still happens either on PCs or the Xbox 360 and the PS3.

You're using invention in the most general functional sense to define innovation, which is overly simplistic.

IE You're saying a touch interface is just something you just touch so whoever invented the first touch screen was the only innovator. Meanwhile the actual interface has gone from resistive technology to capacitive to the Microsoft Surface version of using IR. Every step forward required innovation. Apple putting a touchscreen on a mouse is innovative. Apple creating an interface to allow multi-touch gestures on a touchscreen is innovative. Microsoft using IR sensors to allow velocity detection and object recognition on a touchscreen is innovative.

But since we're talking about innovation, Kinect (and similar technologies) will certainly change the ways we will interact with game consoles - and(!) computers - in the future. Microsoft bought the right startup company this time.

No, Microsoft did not buy PrimeSense.

 

[garybUK]

It doesn't take very long to see deeply flawed design. With Android and Google's partner products, you don't need to do any searching to see just how inferior a platform it is and exactly where Google's priorities lie.

When something stinks, you already smell it downwind.

I feel sorry for Eric T. Mole now that Verizon will carry the iPhone. The game's about change again.

Stats tell a different story: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/01/13/millennial_media_report/

 

[Liquorpuki]

Gates was not the man you paint him out to be at all. Gates was actually quite vocal and involved in company affairs, going as far as e-mailing product groups directly to berate them for poor quality of their products. There are many stories on the net about it :

http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/06/25/gates-sends-angry-e-mail-sounds-just-like-a-customer/

That email is the funniest thing I've read today

 

[*LTD*]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)

Read your stats a little more closely.

 

[hazza.jockel]

IMO apple's real innovation is the way they market and sell their products.

I've seen people walk into an apple store point at something and say to the apple person "i want that" with out knowing what it is or what it can do and then seen the apple person continue to up sell to the customer. No other company really has that kind of attraction.

No other tech company manages to get more hype when it comes to conferences or announcements.

No other tech company makes people want their products more then apple is able to.

So whether their products are innovative or not they can make people believe they are.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

Kinect
3ds
LCD TV's
Wii
Kindle/nook
self-parking cars

The issue isn't a lack of innovation, it's a lack of perceived innovation. From the 1970's to the 2000's, innovation went ridiculously fast, our CPU's (which doubled in speed every ~18 months) could hardly keep up. We went from inch thick video tapes and VCR's to mm thick SD cards and Netflix. From 2000 to now, CPU speeds have been adequate, the huge innovation is over. From here on out, the big ideas have all already been achieved, and it's just a refinement. Heck, even the mp3 player is just a glorified CD player; the iPad, a glorified tablet PC running specialized software.

What's why no one sees any innovation- they're not looking for it the right way.